Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 31, 2023

Paranormal Activity (2009)

Film: Paranormal Activity (2007)
Stars: Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat
Director: Oren Peli
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

All October long, The Many Rantings of John is running a marathon dedicated to the Horror classics of the 1960's-90's that I'm seeing for the first time this month.  If you want to take a look at past titles from previous horror marathons (both this and other seasons) check out the links at the bottom of this article.

Where to end our series, particularly given that it's now Halloween?  That's a great question, and weirdly going to get a similar answer to what we did last year.  In our first round of 1960's-1990's horror, we ended with The Blair Witch Project, which was a new level of marketing for the internet age, with fake websites, found footage independent cinema, & complete unknowns making an absolute blockbuster (and terrific) movie.  This year, we're going to go with a different found footage movie that changed the game for the industry as our final film of the month...and again, maybe the best movie of the bunch (I'm torn between this and The Thing)?  Paranormal Activity would become a phenomenon, if not on par with Blair Witch at least of a similar influence, and is possibly the most profitable film in terms of cost-investment in the history of American cinema.  It's also really, really good.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie takes place entirely in the home of Katie (Featherston) and Micah (Sloat), who have just moved into a house in San Diego.  Katie claims there is an evil spirit of some sort in their house, which Micah (initially cheekily) wants to document using a new camera that he's bought, which is used as the audience's point-of-view the entire film.  They hire a psychic to come to the house, who claims there's a bad energy in the house, but that it's from a demon (not a ghost, his specialty), and gives them a colleague of his who can help them.  He warns them, though, to not anger or provoke it.  This isn't advice that Micah, who refuses to let Katie hire the other guy, takes.  He continually prods it, wanting to invite it to come out and "fight" him, and this leads to more aggressive interactions from the supposed demon.  It goes from shaking doors & turning on lights to starting fires over a Ouija board & eventually possessing Katie.  When it starts to drag Katie across the floor, Micah begins to believe its danger, but the demon expert is out of the country...and Katie has a change of heart about staying at the house (it's implied with her grinning at the camera which Micah can't see that this might be the demon saying this).  On the 21st night, Katie, now clearly possessed, initially hovers over Micah, and then offscreen we hear them having a fight, with Katie suddenly throwing Micah's dead body into the bedroom with a superhuman strength...and then her attacking the camera with a snarl, the film cutting to black as a title card informs us that the police eventually found Micah's body...but Katie is still at-large.

I'll totally own that, unlike Blair Witch, this was not the movie I was most excited to see this month, but it's definitely the movie that hit me the most.  On advice of my friend Cody, I made a point of watching this at-night, in a darkened room, no cell phone (I'm trying really hard to kick the cell phone habit while watching movies-this is as good of a reason as any as it totally enhanced the experience), and just immersing myself in it.  And I was terrified.  It didn't help that I was alone, especially afterward, in a house with an attic door near my bedroom (exactly like the one in the movie), as I attempted to sleep while turning off anything that made noise in the house so I didn't have a heart attack at 3:15 AM.  But Paranormal Activity is smart-it gets a lot of its scares not just from jump scares, but from the silence.  As often as you're seeing a moving sheet or shadow on the wall, you're also seeing nothing...wondering how much of this is real or not.  And the ambiguous ending helped; I hear they try to create a mythology for the film in the sequels, but I don't need that-I'm good with it just being a random nightmare that could happen to anyone, as it's far scarier.

It also is a clear metaphor for an abusive relationship.  Micah is an ass, regularly doing things (like buying the camera or using a Ouija board) that Katie expressly asked him not to do, and it makes things worse.  She's interested in solving a problem, he's interested in how it will make him look.  The entire film really focuses on her wanting to study, wanting to solve the issue...while he's continually focusing on how pretty she is, whether he'll get laid, how he'll look on a camera that is just a narcissistic reflection of himself.  As the film continues, and the audience begins to understand that for them there's no escape (any rational person would've sprung for a hotel at least one of these nights to see if it made a difference, but Micah's not rational and Katie doesn't want another fight), it also shows that their relationship was also doomed.  If it wasn't the demons from outside, it was the demons within that were going to destroy it.

And with that, I'm going to bid you a Happy Halloween.  Enjoy some candy, eat some caramel apples, and watch out for what lurks in the shadows...

Past Horror Month Reviews

Thursday, April 08, 2021

My 2009 Oscar Ballot

We are continuing our Thursday tradition this week with another "If I had a Ballot."  I'm actually excited to say that I've timed this perfectly (we'll have one week off between the "catchup period" of this and us incorporating this into our OVP Ballots each week as we'll now do this after every Best Picture in our series).  But that actually lines up precisely with two weeks after my second vaccination shot, so a day off as I venture forth (masked, socially distanced) into the world for the first time in over a year feels earned.  This week, we're going to look at 2009, and if you've forgotten the rules, these are what I would have chosen for the Oscars had I had a ballot.  To see where I landed with Oscar's contests (which I have seen every single nominee for in these categories), check out the links at the bottom of the page.

Picture

(500) Days of Summer
Avatar
An Education
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Inglourious Basterds
Paranormal Activity
Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' By Sapphire
The Secret in Their Eyes
A Single Man
The White Ribbon

Gold: I go back-and-forth on this one (I actually rewatched the top two films just so that I felt like I was making the right call), but I'll give this to The White Ribbon, a brilliant, moody picture about prejudice & betrayal on the cusp of World War I.
Silver: Close behind it is Avatar.  The dialogue & acting may not be in the same league as The White Ribbon, but it's pure magic cinematically, a visual treat from start-to-finish from one of the most innovative men in modern movies.
Bronze: Quentin Tarantino found the perfect marriage of his brilliant, bold filmmaking style with the expanded budgets fame has afforded to him.  Inglourious Basterds is bloody (very bloody) good fun.

Director

James Cameron (Avatar)
Juan Jose Campanella (The Secret in Their Eyes)
Tom Ford (A Single Man)
Michael Haneke (The White Ribbon)
Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)

Gold: I'm sticking with Haneke here, who has the difficult task of giving us a moody, desperate series of families that are interconnected in ways we can't always tell, and not giving us all of the answers (but upon rewatch, largely giving us all of the answers).
Silver: Cameron delivers a splendid triumph of visual effects, cutting edge technology, and a rich story. Avatar builds an entire world from nothing, something we seem incapable of doing in modern cinema, but looking at how special it is here, it's surely a task we should push for more often.
Bronze: No one makes a movie quite like Tarantino.  Reined in by Sally Menke, Tarantino's last true masterpiece (to date) feels spry, wiry, and full of both whimsy & consequence.

Actor

Jeff Bridges (Crazy Heart)
George Clooney (Up in the Air)
Colin Firth (A Single Man)
Joseph Gordon-Levitt ((500) Days of Summer)
Tahar Rahim (A Prophet)

Gold: Firth has two tasks in A Single Man.  First, he has to find a way to meld into the distinctive environment Tom Ford has created for this character, a man living in a Vanity Fair ad page.  Two, he has to give an unknowable character depth & resonance, bringing a larger-than-life script some grounding.  Both are mission accomplished.
Silver: Rahim aces his work in, deteriorating like a French Michael Corleone before our eyes in A Prophet, his innocence moving away from him, but with it stripping his humanity like a piece of tape tearing away paint, rough & without warning.
Bronze: George Clooney embraces the darkness with this ruthless, soulless figure, a man who prides himself on giving pablum to the masses at the worst moments of their lives.  Without a massive epiphany moment, Clooney is forced to rely on his own bag-of-tricks to give us Ryan's evolution, and as a result we get some of his best work.

Actress

Penelope Cruz (Broken Embraces)
Carey Mulligan (An Education)
Gabourey Sidibe (Precious)
Meryl Streep (Julie & Julia)
Tilda Swinton (Julia)

Gold: Gabourey Sidibe inhabits Precious to the point that you'd almost assume this was her offscreen, so organic she is to the character (she isn't-any interview she's ever done has proven that).  A moving, difficult turn breathing humanity into the type of figure the cinema oftentimes sidelines.
Silver: Tilda Swinton is breathtaking in Julia, a woman so at odds with her own situation she can't even tell when she's lying to herself.  We've been on a Tilda renaissance for the past ten years or so, but let's be honest-this is the high point.
Bronze: Carey Mulligan announces herself in a very different vehicle than Sidibe.  Here she plays a more traditional onscreen ingenue, but plays her differently...a little wiser, a little less naive, knowing but still able to understand what she's learning.  A marvel.

Supporting Actor

Jim Broadbent (Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince)
Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds)
Burghart Klausner (The White Ribbon)
Heath Ledger (The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus)
Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds)

Gold: It's hard to tell if it's Waltz's fault or Hollywood's that this is the only role he seemed capable of playing in the years that followed, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't totally play the part of the diabolical, sadistic Nazi in Inglourious Basterds to a scene-stealing (in the correct way) tee.
Silver: Jim Broadbent is yet another actor who totally aced his Hogwarts exams.  A narcissist with a terrible secret, he brings a shocking grace & candor to this role, playing a "good person" who was brought down by the allure of importance.
Bronze: Michael Fassbender takes Inglourious Basterds on its most succinct chapter as a devilishly handsome spy, giving us the kind of movie star charisma that announces a great new talent (and in this case, it was talent fulfilled).

Supporting Actress

Marion Cotillard (Nine)
Anna Kendrick (Up in the Air)
Melanie Laurent (Inglourious Basterds)
Mo'Nique (Precious)
Julianne Moore (A Single Man)

Gold: So much has been written about Mo'Nique's Mary Jones in Precious, it's hard not to slip into hyperbole or feel you're overstating the work.  But this is one of the best screen creations, a harrowing, human nightmare who haunts our title character.  Mo'Nique makes sure you remember that for all of Mary's faults, society forgot her in the same way they did her daughter.
Silver: There's something so electric in what Marion Cotillard is doing in Nine that I'm surprised that more people don't discuss it amongst her best work.  A neglected wife, knowing but still loving her obsessive husband, she provides the layers that the rest of the film can't muster.
Bronze: Julianne Moore always understands the assignment, and here she's given a difficult part.  She has to play a woman who has been in a codependent relationship with a man she can't have, but has settled angrily for the (waning) attention he is able to provide her.

Adapted Screenplay

An Education
Precious
The Secret in Their Eyes
A Single Man
Up in the Air

Gold: The Secret in Their Eyes plays like a complicated drama, one with tons of hidden secrets, ones that not even the characters can understand about themselves.  Those final scenes, though, when all is revealed, is when the majesty of this script starts to unfurl.
Silver: Rich, knowing dialogue ("I feel old, but not very wise") flows from Nick Hornby's An Education.  Mulligan might be a worthy vessel, but this coming-of-age story gets its insights from his specific portrayal of young Jenny.
Bronze: Precious is unrelenting, but it also knows how to utilize its characters.  Precious (the character) gives us the full weight of her life not through just her harrowing, sparing interactions with Mary Jones, but also by showing us glimpses into a happiness that continues to elude her.

Original Screenplay

(500) Days of Summer
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
A Prophet
The White Ribbon

Gold: Total dialogue gold from Tarantino here, bon mots & wordplay throughout...few writers have such distinct style, and Inglourious Basterds is him ripely taking advantage of the excellent cast he's assembled.
Silver: A total shiver goes down your spine with every conversation, but The White Ribbon doesn't let up, oftentimes dropping horrifying revelations in the middle of scenes, just to see if you're paying attention.  The ending alone earns its nomination.
Bronze: Told out-of-order, this is a film that needs a screenwriter who is paying attention to where we're headed, but 500 Days of Summer has that at its helm, totally subverting (while ultimately playing into) the romantic comedy motif.

Animated Feature Film

Coraline
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Up

Gold: Laika pronounced its arrival with Coraline, a movie that gives us a fairy tale about a girl who doesn't appreciate her parents, and treats her to a world where everything is as she wishes it (or is it?).  Teri Hatcher gives a totally underrated bit of vocal work as the ruthless "Other Mother."
Silver: The first ten minutes of Up are so damn good that you'd be forgiven thinking it's your favorite Pixar movie.  As it is, it's a gorgeous, heartfelt film, with Pixar totally testing the limits of its child audience with a senior citizen protagonist (that goes a bit off the rails in the last act).
Bronze: A wry & witty script, Wes Anderson's distinctive world feels perfectly at home in the world of cartoons, though there are times when I wish he'd have gone with a more traditional vocal cast rather than his "spot the celebrity" route (so typical of his oeuvre).

Original Score

Avatar
A Prophet
Sherlock Holmes
A Single Man
Up

Gold: No asset is greater in A Single Man's arsenal than its elegant, enigmatic score.  In a movie that is about style-over-substance, this is the kind of musical interlude that shows how one can be both, giving us flourishes that fit the crisis of our main character.
Silver: Michael Giacchino creates one of Disney's most memorable pieces with "Married Life" as he somberly underscores the wonder of love.  As I mentioned above, nothing quite compares to that moment the rest of the film, but it's so miraculous it feels fitting that this is what won Michael Giacchino his Oscar.
Bronze: A rowdy, action-packed mystery, Sherlock Holmes utilizes a series of unconventional instruments (most memorably a cimbalom and a broken pub piano) to create a raucous, steampunk beat.

Original Song

"Almost There," (The Princess & the Frog)
"I See You," (Avatar)
"Smoke Without Fire" (An Education)
"The Weary Kind" (Crazy Heart)
"You've Got Me Wrapped Around Your Little Finger" (An Education)

Gold: The whole score of Crazy Heart is filled with toe-tapping tunes, but Ryan Bingham delivers on the promise of "The Weary Kind," the sort of song that will change your life, by giving a tune that actually would do just that.
Silver: The tragic story of Duffy in real life makes it even harder to stomach when you see that she could make music this good after Rockferry.  "Smoke Without Fire" is an electric lounge act, hanging over the whole of An Education.
Bronze: "You've Got Me Wrapped Around Your Little Finger" fits the mood of An Education better (even if I stand behind this medal placement), with us wondering as the film progresses which character is leading which, making us question this theme.

Sound Mixing

District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
The White Ribbon

Gold: In a movie that's largely about sound (and the way that breathing will ripple through an audience), The Hurt Locker delivers fully (that Oscar Best Picture wasn't going to happen for a movie that couldn't craft solid sound work).
Silver: No one quite knows how to do a song score like Quentin Tarantino, and this is some of his best musical incorporation.  Think of the war paint "Cat People" sequence and the way that they use swift shuffles throughout the card game to underscore the tension.
Bronze: District 9's documentary aspect is reliant upon us having the sense that it's happening in real time.  That requires constant background noise that doesn't distract or overpower the main plot.  Watch any action movie, and you'll realize how hard that is to do, and why this picture stands out in such a regard.

Sound Editing

Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Gold: Oh wow.  Avatar creates a fantasy world from nothing, and with that comes an enormous amount of sound design, in this case beautifully-orchestrated.  The battle cry of the Toruk during the first flight sequence stands as the most thrilling scene in any movie in 2009, and the enchanted woods of Pandora are spectacular.
Silver: The terrifying howl of the bargain-basement monster movie aliens in District 9 are about the only rival I could come up with that might have made Avatar look backwards.  Their consistent evolution as the film develops give it some of its more horrific angles.
Bronze: The explosions & manufactured battles of The Hurt Locker give it a neat balance with the quiet hum of some of the civilian scenes.  You get a better sense of what always stays in the soldiers' ears out-of-combat, calling them even as they try to move on.

Art Direction

Avatar
Broken Embraces
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Inglourious Basterds
Sherlock Holmes

Gold: I am not shy about noticing the artistry in animated or visually-driven movies, and boy it's impossible to deny what's happening with Avatar, a gorgeous flourish of blue, violet, & magenta in every corner, making us pine for a world with such beauty bursting at its seams.
Silver: The theater scene (and what comes after) is the most noticeable effect of Inglourious Basterds, but really its everything in this movie, so carefully chosen to fit Tarantino's vision (and his tweaked reality) that hints at that ending coming (even if you don't expect it).
Bronze: Stuart Craig's vision of Harry Potter rarely ceases to wonder.  Even if you don't count his repetition from previous films, the Budleigh Babberton sequence is marvelous, as are the nods to the clock tower & the Horcrux cave...truly eery stuff.

Cinematography

Avatar
Bright Star
Broken Embraces
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
The White Ribbon

Gold: Some of the best parts of The White Ribbon reside in its cinematography.  The movie is set on the eve of World War I, but cinematographer Christian Berger underlines a point of making the movie look very modern in its lensing, as if it could happen today (which is kind of the movie's point).
Silver: Bright Star, on the other hand, feels like it's pulled from a Keats poem, soft & filled with color & light from every angle.  Both films fit the mood of their picture, here with brilliant, flowery beauty.
Bronze: The green & black mood of Half-Blood Prince not only borrows from the book's iconic cover, but it also gives us a darkening in the series, as it shifts toward its conclusion, leaving behind some of the childish light that filled its earlier chapters.

Costume Design

Bright Star
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
A Single Man
The Young Victoria
The White Ribbon

Gold: Janet Patterson finds inspiration in the trees & flowers of the forests our characters seem to so often stroll through in Bright Star, with even the men getting in on the cascade of colors on display in the picture.
Silver: Monique Prudhomme had the unenviable job of figuring out how to find some semblance between four different actors playing the same part.  She does this so well in Imaginarium by only occasionally bending what each actor is wearing, adding touches to distinguish the personality of each performer, adding to the "pulled from the same trunk" vibe of the clothing budget.
Bronze: Sandy Powell is a goddess, and of course The Young Victoria has a lot of big, gigantic gowns (though never one that stands apart as the gown for my taste), but it's actually Powell's eye for male outfitting (look at what a dandy Rupert Friend's Prince Albert is) that sells the picture for me.

Film Editing

(500) Days of Summer
Avatar
District 9
Inglourious Basterds
The White Ribbon

Gold: All of Quentin Tarantino's movies up-until 2009 are really the co-creation of Sally Menke, the fervent straight woman behind the mad genius.  Menke does a painstaking job of piecing together Tarantino's vision, making each chapter connect without the audience noticing.
Silver: The documentary style employed by District 9 would become played out in the years that followed, no one quite capturing the horror of some of the long & medium shots that the editors use (with us catching horror in the periphery of our hero's life).
Bronze: The White Ribbon is, at its heart, a mystery, and mysteries that don't want to show you the criminal too soon need to be edited to perfection-giving us hints, morsels, and misdirects that read so well upon rewatch, but catch you off-guard upon your first glance.

Makeup & Hairstyling

District 9
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Inglourious Basterds
Nine
Star Trek

Gold: I mean, come on here...District 9 is some next level work with the makeup department.  Even if some of the more impressive features of the film are coming from the special effects department, that doesn't negate the intricate, exhaustive transformations that the actors endured to make this movie so special.
Silver: The movie obviously has to navigate the similar looks of four different (very handsome, but in different ways) actors, but that's just the start of what Imaginarium is doing, pulling characters together as if they've been plucked from the pages of an illuminated manuscript.
Bronze: It's occasionally hard to understand whether you should give the makeup department or the casting director more credit for what's happening in Star Trek, as a new generation tries on the looks of a group of icons, but either way this is an achievement.

Visual Effects

Avatar
District 9
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Gold: While you could point to a film like Dawn of the Planet of the Apes or Gravity as perhaps more important, Avatar ranks amongst the most impressive visual feats of the 21st Century, gorgeous, realistic CGI effects that blur the line between animation and reality.  James Cameron sets the bar yet again.
Silver: Though it has neither the technology nor the budget to rival Avatar, District 9 still has an effects team that does what it's supposed to do-aid the picture.  Here we get both nods to the monster horror films of the 1980's while also giving us a disgusting, frightening look at an alien ghetto.
Bronze: It's a tight race here, but I'm going to give it to Harry Potter over Star Trek, with the jaw-dropping cave sequence and the rain-soaked Quidditch match both standouts in a very good year for this category (possibly the best we've done so far for the My Ballots)? 

Sunday, May 10, 2020

Little Ashes (2009)

Film: Little Ashes (2009)
Stars: Robert Pattinson, Javier Beltran, Matthew McNulty, Marina Gatell
Director: Paul Morrison
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

This is potentially going to be a niche question, but do you ever find on a streaming or (especially) your Netflix DVD queue movies that you don't really remember why you wanted to see them in the first place?  I have been trying adamantly during this quarantine (and yes, despite the weather and other people seemingly taking it less seriously, I am very much still sticking to quarantine behavior & will probably be one of the last people to start going out of this willingly), I've been making a point of having a near-constant rotation of Netflix discs, and as a result, I'm getting to some movies that I probably added a decade ago, and never really got around to hitting the top of my queue until now, always lumbering somewhere in the 250's (I have, in grand total, almost 900 films in my Netflix DVD queue).  This is why Little Ashes is coming to you today, a decade after you vaguely remember it existing.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film is based on the early life of Salvador Dali (Pattinson), Luis Bunuel (McNulty), and activist-poet Federico Garcia Lorca (Beltran) when they are attending art school in Madrid.  The three men, obviously incredibly talented, spend most of their days discussing art and politics and revolution, and when Bunuel is controlling the conversation, women & sex.  Dali & Lorca begin to have an emotional affair, which briefly turns into a physical one, albeit an affair that Dali cannot seem to consummate despite clearly wanting to (though the film toes the line a little bit with this, it doesn't feel so much that he's not sexually-attracted to Lorca so much as it is that he can't get past the moral & legal implications of having sex with a man).  The two grow apart, physically, romantically, and most crucially, politically, with Dali becoming much more conservative & capitalistic, while Lorca becomes more involved in the fight against the Nationalists, which leads to his eventual assassination.

I'd like to pretend that my love of art history was the reason that this was initially put on my queue, but that would be a lie.  In 2009, when Little Ashes was released, I would've been in the throes of Twilight fever still.  I was way too obsessed with the Twilight franchise back in the day, both the movies and books, which I'll admit are not high quality, and I'm not going to defend my choices here other than I don't have a lot of guilty pleasures, particularly cultural ones, so I'm allowing myself this (and yes, I am going to read Midnight Sun the day it comes out).  So the idea that my "Team Edward" shirt might be making out with another guy was enough for me to pursue this film, though the Twilight fever apparently wasn't enough for me to ever bump it up my Netflix queue.

The end result is disappointing.  Gay sex scenes in movies are always quite prudish, but with a new star who's about to be a matinee idol for a major film franchise, I have to imagine that the studio heads weren't willing to let more than a few chaste kisses slip between Pattinson and his leading man (though supposedly this is the film where Pattinson "actually" masturbated onscreen because he couldn't simulate a realistic-looking orgasm, and while there's no nudity, that scene does make the film's final cut).  Without that passion, between two men whose character are entirely driven by their own artistic heat, the film falls apart.  It's boring, the leads aren't allowed to have chemistry, and McNulty's Bunuel, who could've been the saving grace, falters into wild mood swings that deny us the ability to understand his character.  As a result, this is a movie that if it is lounging in your queue after a decade, it's okay to admit you just don't want to see.

Saturday, April 25, 2020

The Art of the Steal (2009)

Film: The Art of the Steal (2009)
Director: Don Argott
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 1/5 stars

If you stick around here long enough, you'll know that there are some odd rules on the Oscar Viewing Project, my obsessive project where I try and view as many Oscar-nominated films as I possibly can during this lifetime.  One of the nuances is that I don't watch all of the categories, and specifically skip the shorts categories and the documentaries.  I think it's obvious why I don't do the Shorts (they're hard to find even two years after they came out-they'd border on the impossible if I went back a couple of decades-feature films struggle that far in the past.  However, documentaries aren't that much harder to track down than foreign-language films, and I definitely include those movies in the project.  No, the reason I don't do documentaries is that while it's possible (though not always easy) to be objective about a film that was considered great in its era but has aged poorly (in terms of technology or its stance on social issues), documentaries do not have that same luxury.  What was important even a decade ago might not seem so now, and certainly the way we approach facts, institutions, and the public good has changed.  There are few better illustrations of this than The Art of the Steal, a ten-year-old documentary that I randomly (I would be willing to bet that this film has been slowly-but-steadily moving itself to the top of my Netflix queue for 11 years, and I don't think that's an exaggeration from someone who usually keeps about 900 films on that list) caught yesterday.

(Real life doesn't have spoilers, but this is definitely intended to be a "big reveal" documentary, so proceed with caution) The movie is about the Barnes Foundation, a collection of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist art valued at some $25 billion.  Pretty much every artist you can think of from the late 19th and early 20th century is represented-van Gogh, Cezanne, Renoir, Degas, Picasso, Modigliani.  Another of the artists, Henri Matisse, apparently said of the collection and the school that once housed it, "it is the only sane place in America to view art."  Suffice it to say, it is a thing of value, and as the film says, the owner of the collection, Albert Barnes, had a very specific way he wanted the art to be appreciated and viewed.  After his death, though, there were consistent leadership changes within his foundation, many of which violated the spirit and letter of his will, which stipulated where he wanted the art to be presented.  The film ends with (according to the directors) an enormous amount of political maneuvering to move the collection from Lincoln University, where Barnes bequeathed it, to Philadelphia, to be a part of the larger Philadelphia Museum of Art, and indeed that is where it now lives, absent from a traditional university setting, but certainly viewed by considerably more people than it would have been in either Barnes' lifetime or in the original settings he stipulated in his will.

In my opinion, director Don Argott (despite his protestations), presents a one-sided argument in his movie.  There is little effort into understanding anyone who would have been supportive of moving the art from its original location in Lincoln University to Philadelphia.  How Argott could assume that it's not one-sided is absurd, and he doesn't make, in my opinion, enough of an effort to present both sides of this discussion.  Some of the figures involved in moving the collection to Philadelphia declined the interview (figures like billionaire art collector Ronald Perelman and Pew Charitable Trusts CEO Rebecca Rimel), but not all of them.  He has as part of his film former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, whom he heavily implies might have used state funds prior to a decision to move the art collection, of doing so without telling a court that there was $100 million in the state budget that could be used to keep the collection at Lincoln University (which needed the money to make repairs and modernize the museum); he certainly lists Rendell as one of several suspects who might have known about the money in the state budget.  But he doesn't ask Rendell about this, which makes me wonder about partiality in general in the documentary.  And once trust in the documentarians goes, it's hard to take what you've seen prior seriously.  Not all of the flashy editing, great twist reveals, and salacious name-dropping in the world makes up for a movie you don't think is being honest.

But there's also a more intriguing argument here.  Without abandon throughout the film, people loyal to Barnes' vision fight for the man's ability to dictate what happened to his art from beyond the grave, but no one ever asks-why should we care?  These paintings are not Barnes' creation-they are the creation of people like Pablo Picasso and Claude Monet.  Why is it that Barnes gets to dictate for all-time how these paintings, which he once owned, get to be displayed?  It feels absurd to me that these get to remain his property for all time, even though he's been dead for 70 years.  You can argue that his method was correct, but arguing that "it was his his vision" is a bad argument-he's been dead far longer than he ever owned any of this art.  Putting aside the moral issue of whether or not there were falsehoods presented to a court (which, it's worth noting, that same judge eventually argued still didn't change his decision that the art could move to Philadelphia), Barnes should not get to dictate what happens to another person's artistic property for the rest of time just because he happened to die while he was still owning the art.  

It's hard to imagine an unbiased documentary today not at least discussing this perspective.  Views on inheritance and accumulated wealth have shifted pretty dramatically in the past decade (look at the passion behind Elizabeth Warren's presidential campaign for clear evidence of this), and it's worth asking-why should Barnes' vision for this property continue to be dictated decades later?  One could put up a better argument that these paintings do more good as part of the public trust rather than continuing to be tethered to their previous owner; that his dominion over them should have ended when he died, and absent a spouse or a dependent who relied on Barnes for financial support, would be better off going to a public museum overrun by a government (which is instilled by a majority of the people).  The documentary spends so much time deifying Albert Barnes, that, even if they view him as a genius and innovator, it doesn't have time to question at what point does his dictate over art he didn't even create end?

Thursday, July 03, 2014

OVP: Picture (2009)

OVP: Best Picture (2009)

The Nominees Were...



James Cameron and Jon Landau, Avatar
Gil Netter, Andrew A. Kosove, and Broderick Johnson, The Blind Side
Peter Jackson and Carolynne Cunningham, District 9
Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, An Education
Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier, and Greg Shapiro, The Hurt Locker
Lawrence Bender, Inglourious Basterds
Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness, and Gary Magness, Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire
Joel and Ethan Coen, A Serious Man
Jonas Rivera, Up
Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman, and Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

My Thoughts: All right-after months of off-and-on writeups chronicling the 2009 Oscars, it's time that we get to the big enchilada, the big kahuna, the top prize.  Best Picture.  If you're new to the blog, there are links at the bottom of this article to all nineteen of the past contests in 2009, as well as as the past three OVP Best Picture races.  If you've been waiting patiently for this write-up and want to see where I rank this list, then let's start right now.

2009 was the first year in the revived expanded Best Picture field, and so there are quite a few films in this race that you wouldn't normally see, perhaps most glaring being A Serious Man.  Though the Coen Brothers are frequently nominated for Oscars (they would get a bevy of Oscar nominations the following year for True Grit and at the time were coming off of a major win in Best Picture two years prior).  However, A Serious Man is one of the oddest films I've ever seen nominated for Best Picture-the tale of one man's life falling apart, causing him to question his faith isn't what you'd call a bad movie, though I do feel that the Coen Brothers meander far too frequently and occasionally decide to just be quirky for the sake of it.  This film lacks the near perfect structuring of a previous movie like No Country for Old Men, and though it has the biblical allegory thing down pat (we get it, he's Job), I just couldn't help but feel that this was more a technical achievement than an overall great film.  The Coen Brothers seem to be showing how brilliant they can be behind the camera, which is considerable, but the film lacks the cohesion and narrative to drive their brilliance home, and this is Best Picture, not Best Director.

I feel like if there's a forgotten film in this lineup, it's probably An Education.  When I was listing out the ten films nominated, I remembered A Serious Man even though it was clearly in tenth place, but An Education feels like that film that was probably on a lot of ballots, but rarely in the top five.  I'm a bigger defender of this film than most, though, and I love the central performance so much from Carey Mulligan.  Lone Scherfig's film always finds Mulligan's Jenny at the center, but I like the way that the world keeps moving around her-the Rosamund Pike character in particular stands out to me as one of those touches that makes the rest of the film seem more meaningful than it could have been.  Her Helen is Jenny after a few years, persistently trying to find meaning in a life that doesn't seem like it can possibly result in any.  That's the magic of An Education-it keeps holding Jenny's life up to other character's lives as a mirror.  It wouldn't work if Mulligan weren't superb as the central woman-you need someone who can both define her character and make sure she's open enough for the audience to project onto, but performances are a component of this race.  Personally, of these ten films, I would have been one of the ballots finding room for An Education in my Top 5.

Since we're already discussing a Best Actress nominee, it seems fair to head on over to one of the others, and I'll go with Precious.  Here, again, you need a main character who is a little bit of an audience proxy onscreen, but Precious has more solidly-embedded characters, particularly Gabby Sidibe in the title role and Mo'Nique as Mary Jones.  The film itself is above average, but it never quite has the standing that the lead roles can achieve-this is a monstrous acting duet, but the film and plot can't quite get to the point where they're equalling the acting.  Think of the way that the story meanders with Precious's daydreams and her "too good to be true" relationship with her teacher.  This isn't particularly compelling cinema, but it's brought that direction by the two lead actors.  Like some of Lee Daniels' other films, there are flights of fancy that just don't work, but he's so great at casting perfect actors to play interesting characters that you can feel yourself forgiving him.

District 9 is kind of an in an opposite camp in this regard.  Sharlto Copley is also a fairly blank protagonist, more so than even Jenny or Precious, and the film itself is entirely driven by its concept, rather than dialogue or acting.  This isn't to insult the film (it's a good movie), but it is to say that the film is really more an idea.  It's fascinating to look at District 9 now and see how much of a shadow that it has cast, with the rise in popularity of dystopian worlds in the years since (anyone see the connections between The Hunger Games and District 9?), and the actual on-paper plot is great.  The film has some pacing problems (it takes too long to get to its eventual conclusion, particularly since we know the conclusion near the beginning of the film), but the movie understands humanity, and this was a worthy and unexpected film that certainly wouldn't have been honored in the Top 10 had it not been for the expanded field.

Up also would have been on the sidelines in a five-wide field (I'm not 100% convinced that Toy Story 3 the following year couldn't have pulled off the nomination, though).  I have soured a little bit on this film the more I write about it, mostly because there's such a large imbalance between the first ten minutes of the film and the rest of the movie in terms of quality.  Every critic points this out, but the first ten minutes of the movie are sublime, looking at the way that we quickly live our lives and in particular how meaningful small moments become as we get older and realize all of the dreams we let pass us by.

The remainder of the film can never compare, though.  It's like it's two different films, and while the rest of the film is nowhere near a bad movie, you cannot help but judge it in comparison and find it lacking. In particular, I hated the need for a common enemy in the final third in the Christopher Plummer character-why couldn't they have just made it to the Falls and realized that life has to move on, rather than having them be attacked by some random old man chasing a bird?  It cheapens the rest of the film's complicated questions, and I don't care if it's a movie for children-when Pixar was at its peak (and from 2007-2010 it was), Up could have been on-par with WALL-E, and not just Monsters Inc. (which, to quote Marge Simpson in surprisingly apt context, "is still pretty good!")

Avatar is another film that occasionally falters in the face of its own promise.  The movie, like a lot of James Cameron films, never quite has the dialogue that it should, and the plot can be seen from a mile away (Stephen Lang's Miles Quaritch also falls into the unnecessarily evil villain camp, though at least his character is necessary to the rest of the movie).  However, I cannot help but be enamored with this movie in a way I couldn't possibly be with Up.  The film is epic in its scope, and truly marvelous in creating a new world.  There's so much ambition here, and most of it ends up being realized.  The script aside (which, admittedly, is a larger than usual aside for me), there's really no flaws-the film's art direction and visual effects are absolutely spellbinding, and not for nothing, but it's rare that a director has the guts to create an entirely original world onscreen in the same mold that George Lucas did with Star Wars.  I suspect, with three more films coming in this series and the mountain of money this film made, that James Cameron's ingenuity will payoff at a similar rate to Lucas's (financially, though hopefully less so creatively).

Cameron's main competition on Oscar night was The Hurt Locker, though at the time of the Oscars it had become less a coronation than a competition, and like any film that's on a warpath to Best Picture, it got nominated enough that I've discussed it to death at this point, though I have to admit that unlike The King's Speech, The Artist, and Argo, my opinion of this particular Best Picture winner has improved throughout all of these write-ups, which should hopefully bode well for 12 Years a Slave as we start up 2013 this weekend.  The greatness of Kathryn Bigelow lies in the way that she builds tension onscreen-the way that she manages to get truly inside her main character, watching hin falter and succeed in small doses.  She's at her best when the vision is directly on her main character of William James-the rest of the cast, while admirable and occasionally good, never lend themselves as well as James to the overall conflicted nature he has toward war.  The film is crisp, and though I didn't feel it in the way that I did Avatar it's hard to argue its technical merits, and it has a stronger central force than something like the Coen Brothers' technical achievement does that year.

Up in the Air is a film that is probably forever more a product of its specific time than it will be in years later when it is revisited (think The Graduate or Midnight Cowboy).  Made at the height of the Great Recession, the film showed how damaging to your psychology being laid off can be, and how detached from life George Clooney's Ryan Bingham became by constantly pulling the dreams out from under people.  The film does a lot of things right, not least of which is finding that sweet spot between Clooney's charm and the lost nature of his public persona.  Clooney makes this movie what it is, and I still think it's his best big screen work to date.  That said, the movie also has a bit of a balance problem (we're quibbling here, but this is for a Best Picture Oscar so the small matters), as it never gets the emotional balance in Clooney's relationship with Vera Farmiga right (it seems so tacked on and gimmicky the way it plays out), and it cannot possibly match the cold harshness of watching people lose their jobs.  Being fired is a bit like being told you have cancer (psychological studies back me up there), and the movie has trouble finding emotional resonance that can match those moments where Bingham ruins people's lives and dreams.  Still, there's so much truth and such strong work from Clooney here the film can be forgiven for never quite realizing the emotional zeniths it reaches in certain scenes as it does in the scenes it wants to prioritize for the sake of the main character.

Inglourious Basterds is a film that should have more balance problems than it does, but alas this is that rare Tarantino film where every little interspersing scene is glued-to-the-screen incredible.  I love the way that he just moves with such confidence onscreen in all of his films, certain that this next scene will be just as engrossing and mesmerizing to the audience as the last.  This confidence is not without risk (see the pacing problems of Django Unchained for an example), but here it's wonderful.  The movie does have high points (the opening, the card game, and the "Cat People" sequence), but those don't steal away from basically every scene being crisp, necessary, and lively (there's a reason I gave this the Editing OVP trophy).  I still think that the penultimate and ending scenes seem a little bit much, even for Tarantino, but overall this is the perfect crystallization of what Tarantino's later films have become: bawdy, stylistic, and jaw-dropping.

I usually write this Best Picture lineup and whichever film lends itself best to the next paragraph gets their moment in the sun, so I'm not sure if I am saving the worst for last with The Blind Side, but it definitely stands out in the sense that it is nothing like the other films on this list.  I would go so far as to say, however, that The Blind Side was probably the closest of any film here to disrupting the "real five" nominees.  It's a massive hit, a feel-good one at that, and has its lead headed toward an Oscar stampede-those are the sorts of things that get you a surprise nomination in Best Picture.

The film itself is not good, and there's no sugar-coating that fact.  It's not Doctor Doolittle level of bad for a Best Picture nomination, and as I've mentioned before, Sandra Bullock has enough movie star charisma and personality to make the film watchable, but the rest of the cast is making an ABC Family movie, and that's really what this feels like-the racial angle of the film seems too simplified for a film that claims to have something to say, and while I think there should be a place for conservative cinema (I really do), I don't think that you can gloss over key points you're trying to make with an "and that's the way it is" sort of attitude, which is what the film does with its script and its larger point about race and economics.  Still, Bullock is insanely watchable and so while I cannot condone this nomination, I get it.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes of course split their nominations between Musical/Comedy and Drama, so while the usual five (The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, Up in the Air, and the victorious Avatar) competed in Best Drama, you had five new names to the list in Best Comedy: (500) Days of Summer, It's Complicated, Julie and Julia, Nine, and in a surprise win, The Hangover.  The BAFTA Awards went with most of the usual five, cutting Inglourious in favor of the far more British An Education, and giving their top prize to The Hurt Locker.  Finally, there's the Producers Guild Awards, which also had a lineup of ten, but cut A Serious Man and The Blind Side in favor of Invictus and Star Trek.  One of these two films surely were competing for eleventh place, and my gut says that though Star Trek would have a bigger presence with Oscar that year, Invictus and the afterglow of Clint Eastwood probably put that film in the "just miss" category.
Directors I Would Have Nominated: Surely in a field that is ten large the Academy could have found room for at least one great foreign language film.  The Foreign Film Oscar race made room for A Prophet and The Secret in Their Eyes, and both are considerably better than a lot of these films, but The White Ribbon is the movie that, with its eery command over the audience, most deserved to pick-up this nomination, and quite frankly, may have even deserved the trophy.
Oscar’s Choice: Though it was probably a bit closer than Best Director, there was just no stopping The Hurt Locker stampede once Bigelow's Oscar train started rolling.
My Choice: We'll anticlimactically start with me giving the trophy to Avatar, with Inglourious Basterds coming in behind it.  The rest of the lineup is tough, though, but I think it should look something like: An Education, The Hurt Locker, Precious, Up in the Air, Up!, District 9, A Serious Man, and The Blind Side.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Do you favor AMPAS's selection of The Hurt Locker, my choice of Avatar, or one of the other eight?  Who do you think was in sixth and eleventh place?  And what film was the best movie of 2009?  Share in the comments!


Past Best Picture Contests: 2010, 2011, 2012